Talk:Action off Noordhinder Bank

Military history: Maritime / British / European / German / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War I task force

Strange assertion

" Eventually, after other similar defeats, the small torpedo boats such as those used off Noordhinder Bank were relegated to coastal patrol and heavier units were finally transferred to even the balance of power in the English Channel."

Since the anglo-french allies controlled Dunkirk, Calais, Boulogne etc throughout the first world war ( and quite unlike the second world war ), and thus controlled the strait of dover leading to the english channel, it seems quite strange to refer to the german small ships operating from belgium as relating to the balance of power in the english channel. The waters between Belgium and Essex where these torpedo boats operated are part of the North Sea, not the English Channel.Eregli bob (talk) 15:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Location of Battle

The map shows the Dogger Bank, not the Noordhinder Bank, which is far to the South. --Andreas (talk) 07:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved thanks to Keith. --Andreas (talk) 10:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, more by accident than design. ;O) Keith-264 (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

@Sturmvogel 66: Yet it seems routine in milhist articles. Keith-264 (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's unfortunate, and something that I remedy whenever I see it. Unless the template is being used to set the number of columns, in which case I'll leave it alone.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:32, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, no room for consensus then, pity. Keith-264 (talk) 13:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]